From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7526 invoked by alias); 11 May 2015 17:16:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 7516 invoked by uid 89); 11 May 2015 17:16:09 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 11 May 2015 17:16:09 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4BHG7xF009758 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 11 May 2015 13:16:07 -0400 Received: from [10.10.116.40] ([10.10.116.40]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t4BHG61l010963; Mon, 11 May 2015 13:16:06 -0400 Message-ID: <5550E3D2.2080408@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 17:16:00 -0000 From: Jason Merrill User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Hubicka , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: False ODR violation positives on anonymous namespace types References: <20150511142810.GA6584@kam.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <20150511142810.GA6584@kam.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2015-05/txt/msg00971.txt.bz2 On 05/11/2015 09:28 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote: > We already discussed earlier that type_in_anonymous_namespace_p is not working > on compund types, because these do not have TYPE_STUB_DECL. I thought those are > !TYPE_NAME types. What is reason for !TYPE_NAME type with no TYPE_STUB_DECL? > Is it always a compound type with typedef name? Right. Typedef names have no linkage, so they aren't really ODR types; only classes and enums have linkage. Why do you want to check other types? Jason